netdev - Re: [patch net-next 5/8] Introduce sample tc action

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <5824D59A.2000804@gmail.com>
Date:   Thu, 10 Nov 2016 12:16:26 -0800
From:   John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>
To:     Yotam Gigi <yotamg@...lanox.com>, Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>,
        "netdev@...r.kernel.org" <netdev@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:     "davem@...emloft.net" <davem@...emloft.net>,
        Ido Schimmel <idosch@...lanox.com>,
        Elad Raz <eladr@...lanox.com>,
        Nogah Frankel <nogahf@...lanox.com>,
        Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>,
        "jhs@...atatu.com" <jhs@...atatu.com>,
        "geert+renesas@...der.be" <geert+renesas@...der.be>,
        "stephen@...workplumber.org" <stephen@...workplumber.org>,
        "xiyou.wangcong@...il.com" <xiyou.wangcong@...il.com>,
        "linux@...ck-us.net" <linux@...ck-us.net>,
        "roopa@...ulusnetworks.com" <roopa@...ulusnetworks.com>
Subject: Re: [patch net-next 5/8] Introduce sample tc action

On 16-11-10 11:58 AM, Yotam Gigi wrote:
> 
> 
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: John Fastabend [mailto:john.fastabend@...il.com]
>> Sent: Thursday, November 10, 2016 9:38 PM
>> To: Jiri Pirko <jiri@...nulli.us>; netdev@...r.kernel.org
>> Cc: davem@...emloft.net; Yotam Gigi <yotamg@...lanox.com>; Ido Schimmel
>> <idosch@...lanox.com>; Elad Raz <eladr@...lanox.com>; Nogah Frankel
>> <nogahf@...lanox.com>; Or Gerlitz <ogerlitz@...lanox.com>;
>> jhs@...atatu.com; geert+renesas@...der.be; stephen@...workplumber.org;
>> xiyou.wangcong@...il.com; linux@...ck-us.net; roopa@...ulusnetworks.com
>> Subject: Re: [patch net-next 5/8] Introduce sample tc action
>>
>> On 16-11-10 11:35 AM, John Fastabend wrote:
>>> On 16-11-10 03:23 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>>> From: Yotam Gigi <yotamg@...lanox.com>
>>>>
>>>> This action allow the user to sample traffic matched by tc classifier.
>>>> The sampling consists of choosing packets randomly, truncating them,
>>>> adding some informative metadata regarding the interface and the original
>>>> packet size and mark them with specific mark, to allow further tc rules to
>>>> match and process. The marked sample packets are then injected into the
>>>> device ingress qdisc using netif_receive_skb.
>>>>
>>>> The packets metadata is packed using the ife encapsulation protocol, and
>>>> the outer packet's ethernet dest, source and eth_type, along with the
>>>> rate, mark and the optional truncation size can be configured from
>>>> userspace.
>>>>
>>>> Example:
>>>> To sample ingress traffic from interface eth1, and redirect the sampled
>>>> the sampled packets to interface dummy0, one may use the commands:
>>>>
>>>> tc qdisc add dev eth1 handle ffff: ingress
>>>>
>>>> tc filter add dev eth1 parent ffff: \
>>>> 	   matchall action sample rate 12 mark 17
>>>>
>>>> tc filter add parent ffff: dev eth1 protocol all \
>>>> 	   u32 match mark 17 0xff \
>>>> 	   action mirred egress redirect dev dummy0
>>>>
>>>> Where the first command adds an ingress qdisc and the second starts
>>>> sampling every 12'th packet on dev eth1 and marks the sampled packets with
>>>> 17. The third command catches the sampled packets, which are marked with
>>>> 17, and redirects them to dev dummy0.
>>>
>>> The sampling algorithm was not randomized based on the above commit
>>> log? It really needs to be for all the reasons Roopa mentioned earlier.
>>> Did I miss some email on why it didn't get implemented?
>>>
>>> Also there was an indication the already is actually implemented
>>> correctly so don't we need the hw/sw to behave the same. The whole
>>> argument about sw/hw parity, etc.
>>
>> sorry bit of a typo there corrected 2nd paragraph here...
>>
>> Also there was an indication the hardware is already implemented \
>> correctly so don't we need the hw/sw to behave the same. The argument
>> about sw/hw parity, etc.
> 
> Our hardware currently does not support sampling with random behavior, so 
> we did implement it in software too. 
> 
> But, the API is extensible and it is possible to add a random keyword to 
> the tc action to allow random sampling. In that case, the keyword will be
> implemented in sw only and our driver will fail offloading it.
> 

For many use cases this will be limiting but OK maybe this is good
enough for something and we can add a flag/attribute to support random
sampling. Works for me.